Originally Posted By: Foolkiller
I had dinner with Mark Haspel on Wednesday night, I discussed these issues:

1) Why does CGC refuse to release a list of books that it believes are suspect (by virtue of being submitted by this person)?

legal liability. They are contractually bound not to release this information from the submitter and legal action can be instituted. Even though banned, there is no conviction or any legal determination or even actual concrete evidence that Ewert trimmed the books himself. Therefore, they are still bound to protect the confidentiality.

2) Why does CGC not "proactively" contact registry set owners of the suspected books?

See answer above. Their job is to review any books to check for safety. Using information they hold is a potential violation of privacy.

Brian: Thank you for relaying some information. I hope you'll understand that I don't consider an official response from CGC on the matter but at least something is out there.

However, the responses on 1 & 2 just don't make any sense. I deal in contracts and federal law/regs on private health information all day long. To my knowledge, there is nothing that would cover the information at issue here: linking a CGC # with the identity of the submitter. I always defer to not being aware of some state or other statute/reg. But I have not seen anything in the submission form that would create an obligation on CGC's part to hold this information as protected. Therefore, at the risk of being blunt, it's either BS, paranoid or I'm an *spoon* b/c I've forgotten something.

"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence."
Charles Bukowski

GACollectibles: It seems very....passive aggressive.
DrWatson: I have known him several years and I can say with some absurdness that there isn't anything passive about him.

Passive Aggressive spite posting like a B0$$, since 2007.